LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 

DDD0bl4a724 _ 






\<f 












.-^' 








°o 



^oV 




'^'0^ 




















o :b s e: i^ "%^ -A. T I o IV s , 

UPON THE PROPOSAL 

To Amend the Federal Constitution 

ABOLISHING SLAVERY THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES, 

AND THE HISTORY OF PARTIES AND THE CONDITION 
AND PROSPECTS OF THE COUNTRY. 



^. 



BY 

Hon. LEVI BISHOI>. 



Detroit, January 19, 1865. 

I do not propose to speak at this time as a politician or as a partisan ; though the 
history, objects and policy of parties iu this country will necessarily come more or less 
under review in the course of my remarks. 

Nor do I propose at this time to investigate the causes which have produced the 
present condition of things in this country. I shall not enquire whether slavery was the 
cause of the war, or whether the agitation in ihe Northern States against the system of 
slavery in the South, was the cause of it. At the present time 3.nd in the present condition 
of the country, the discussion of these questions can amount to little raore than crimina- 
tion and re-ciimination. They can be far more easily solved by the future historian than 
by us. 

Nor do I propose to discuss the merits, legality or policy of the various measures 
adopted by the present admini-stration for the overthrow of slavery in the South. Whether 
these measures were wise or tended to produce the results sought by them I need not now 
enquire. They are a part of the fixed history of the countiy and whether for weal or woe 
cannot now be changed. Discussion cannot modify or effect them. Their effects have 
been to some extent already developed, and in the present state of the war and of parties, 
they will no doubt be left by those in power to produce such other fruits as may natural- 
ly result from them. 

I shall not discuss the question, whether it would be better, if we shall be driven to 
the alternative, to have the Union restortd with a central despotic government, exercising 
unlimited power over States, municipalities and individuals under the empty forms of con- 
stitutional liberty, or whether it would be better, if as I have said, we shaJl be driven to the 
alternative, to let the Union of the States be abandoned, provided the States themselves 
shall still maintain their system of constitutional freedom. This question has been dis- 
cussed to some extent since the war commenced, but it appears to me that it can only 
be settled by long experience, and probably it will not and cannot be settled by the 
present generation. 

I shall at this time, lay out of view entirely, the mooted question, whether freeing the 
negroes of the South would or would not tend to promote the immediate and ultimate 
benefit of themselves and their race, and also the questions whether the abolition of sla- 
Tery would or would not tend, to the benefit of the Southern States, or of the North- 
em Slates, as of other nations and countries. 



2 .Si>^ 

I propose, in the observations T may now have to make, to let by-gones be by-gones, 
to let the <iea(i past bury its dnnd, to look about us jiwt as we aiv aiirl just where we are, 
to recognize the logic nI pa!-sing events and of the present condition of public affairs, to 
look directly at a i^ivmi odject, and attempt togrtipple with the srtupendous bubject of sla- 
very a^ it now ])re!-ents itsell in tliis country. 

During most ol the time since the Federal Constitution was formed, there has been a 
party in tiie countiy known as tiie Deojocratic parly. The elements wliich composed it 
Jiiid uiuch 10 do in lonuina the Slate government system and also tlie Federal Union. This 
party -^xerted a controling intlueme in shaping the national yiohcy under tie Federal Con- 
*i itu'iou and in buildinii up a great nation of freemen. At an early period of my life 1 at- 
■ached myself to this paity. 1 have acted with it ever since, and 1 low see no reason for 
;p?.vjn.i ii. 

There have also been at nearly all periods since the Federal Ctmstitulion was formed, 
other parties posses^hig in a g'eater or less degree the < ontidejice of tlie ]>ublic, having 
vari(uis objccis in view and maintainiiig v-irious principles, but generally oryanized for 
ai-tion against the D^-mocaiic )iarly. As a geneial thing these parties ])roiessed, vith the 
Deiuooiaiic party, adhesion to the PVderal Cons i ution and a firm determination to main- 
tain it and the system of jiovernment fo med hy il. As a gene al thing also the j>rinciples 
thoy prof--ssed, and tiie objects they sought to attain, and their political action tended to 
p otlu'^e the.se results. The questions they raised and disi itssed were subordinate to the 
tuudaraental principles embodied in the i onstitution. or they were questions which aiose 
upon the proper construction of that instiument. Tlie CVmslilution was legarded by them 
a.s it was by the Democratic party, not indeed as a thing sacred in itself, which could not 
be touched even w;tli a view to modification, without the charge of sacrilege, but as a settled 
frame of government, sometimes called a national <omi»act, the best ever foimed by men, 
coii'aining the results of long and wise letiection. and of p.trio'ic and jirolbund deliber- 
uon which was assented toand ratified by the several States and l^y Ihe peojde, and which 
wa.s entitled to the highest esteem of all i)arties and of the whole country. 

Oue party may propeily be regarded as constituting an exception in this general char- 
acr.er of parties. I refer to that famiiiaily known as the anti-slavery or abolition i)arty. — 
Ts it judging too harshly to say that this paity was formed for the [lurpose of attaining a 
givun object, by any means within the reach of men, regardless t)f the pi irate rights of 
property and in detiance of legal obligation'? Perhaps it was not wrong to agitate the 
question of the abolition of slavery throughout the count) y, if that object had been sought 
hy paciiic means th'ough the action of the State government-i, or by an amendment of the 
Federal Constitution in the mode pointed out in that instiuiuent. But it was wrong and 
highly criminal to pursue that object by the reckless means befoie suggested. In this 
lay the cause of the feeling, bitter and nearly universal, against this party and abolition- 
ism so-called. The object sought was perhaps commendable in itself and it was favored 
OTlh much public sympathy ; but the people of this country are law-abiding, and 1 be- 
lieve it is a well settled rule that the end however good, does not justify the means. This 
party therefore incuired the public odium because it sought its object by means and princi- 
ples of action which neither justice or wisdom or patuotism could approve. It was against 
these means and principles of action that the public mind and feeling revolted. 

Most of the Norlhreni)eo|)le have for years had no sympathy with the institution of .sla- 
very, and they had no objection to see it disappear frotn our system by any means which the 
State and Natiotial constitutions could san(>tion, and which should be consistent with justice 
an<l suund public morality. But the great m jonty of the North did object to its forcible 
extinction by mean* which were at war with tlie settled law ol the land. They weie dis- 
posed to stand by the laws and constitution, and let the abolition of slavery be worked 
out when it could be done by legitimate means as had already been doue in many of the 
old States and in much the largest (lart of the National territory. This was also, as I im- 
derstand it, the position of thr Democratic party and of the old 'VVhig party on this suhject. 
These were always constitutional parties. Nor were they ju-opeily pro-slaveiy parties. 
They were never in favor of slavery for its o^^n sake, aiid they were ahvays willing to see 
it disap](ear by any legitimate means. 

When the war b oke out, in fullfilment of repeated predictions by the ablest statemen 
of the country, the Democratic parly was leady to sustain the administration ot Mi'. Lincoln, 
eaf-nesily and efficiently, in prosecuting ihe war by all K-gil means, for the maintenance 
oflheUn!on, the Constitution and the supremacy of the laws, against wha'ever foices 
Uiight be found in arms against them. In tliis the Demociatic jiarly made no change of 
position or principles. They stood by the Union and the Constitution where they had 



always stood and stand now. And the war was thus pro^^ecnted aenerally, for about two 
years, when a ciian^e took [)lace in the policy of ihe administration as openly expessed. 

I do not propose to discuss the wisdom of this change, or to arrai^in any set of men or 
any party for making it. It is enough for the j)resent di.scussion that it tw^k place. Then 
the Democratic party, true to its pnnciples, witlidrew its political suppor;. from the admin- 
istration of Mr. Lincoln, so far as his diitinctive abolilion-of-slavery policy was concerned. 
It was conceived that such policy struck directly at the great principles of the Con.<<titution, 
and that it was in violation of the spirit in which that instrument was formed and adopted, 
and in which alone it and the Union could be maintained. It was believed by muny, if 
not in fact, by the whole body of the Democratic nariy, that such policy tended directly 
and even necessarily to strengthen and confirm tSe rebellion, and finally to a separation 
of the States and a breakincr up of the old Union. The Democratic party wished above all 
things, to prevent these results. They wished to maintain the Constitution as its authors 
had "framed it. They wished to j'estore the Union, the peace and the prosperity of the 
ccuntry. These wishes directed our action. With these sentiments we went into the last 
Presidential campaign. We went before the people and discussed fully, earnestly and 
fairly, the great questions at issue before the country. 

We have ever held that the people had intelligence and virtue enough to decide all 
public questions properly, and that our system of popular government was safe in their 
hands. The most momentous questions involving the destiny of the country for ages to 
come, were submitted to the people f«r their decision on the eighth day of November, 
eighteen hundred and sixty-four. The people then decided those questions, at least in 
form. The decision was emphatic, and the country is bound by it. 

Convictions, honest convictions, convictions against the strongest wishes and sympa- 
thies of the human heart, will oftentimes settle down into the mind with a force and a 
weight that are irresistible. Many worthy citizens are unable to res'st the conviction that 
the decision thus made, was the great final blow against a re-union 04 all the States 
under the Federal Constitution. Let no ungenerous one say that the wish is father to 
the thought. Men who thus think and believe are among the best and most patriotic this 
country can produce. But convictions will remain such, however much we may regret or 
resist them. 

Many believe, that the first great error was in the election of Mr. Lincoln, in eighteen 
hundred and sixty ; and th»t the fatal and final error was in his re-election in eighteen hun- 
dred and sixty-four. Many honestly believe that we shall never see the old Union again 
restored. Two main reasons are assigned for this belief. First, that the Northern States 
have not the material power to crush the Southern States and people into submission ; in 
other words, that the power of resistance in its various forms in the South, equals, if it 
does not in fact, surpass the power of attack in the North. Second, that Mr. Lincoln has 
placed all other feasible means of restoration beyond the reach of his administration. 
These, as I have said, are the solemn and honest convictions of many worthy citizens. I 
do not discuss these propositions, I merely allude to thera in passing. 

Others are of a very different opinion. They think and believe that the Union can be 
restored by force of arins ; and they feel the strongest deteimination of which our nature 
is susceptible, that it shall be. This resolute spirit is far more manly than gloomy des- 
pondency, and for myself, I will continue to hope even asainst hope, so long a respectable 
number of our fellow citizens may hope and expect to efiect a restoration. But the terri- 
ble conviction re.-.ts on the minds of many, that the real issue now before the country, 
although not openly and distinctly announced, is a question of boundary between the 
Northern and South'»rn Confederacies as two indef)endent nations. Many felt as I did, 
that there was good ground for hope in the ele tion of General McClellan, but they feel, 
and feel honestly, that theie is but little if any ground for hope now, that the result was 
otherwise. 

In this general view of public affairs and of our future prospects, — in this state of 
hopes and fears and of expectations und convictions, the question presents itself, what 
action, if any, the people 01 the United States had better take on the subject of slavery in 
the South ; upon the supposition, either, tiiat the old Union can and will be restored by 
military power ; or that it will not and cannot be, and that the real question now is, as has 
been suggested, and as many believe, one of boundary between the North and South. 

As I have said, the great and inseperablo objection to the anti-slavery agitatioii in the 
form in which it presented itself, was, that its authors proposed to attain their object by 
means that could not be app oved by right minded men. The agitation would have been 
stripped of much that was objectionable, and it would have encountered much less opposi- 



tion, if it had been proposed in good faith, to bring about the extinction of slavery in & 
mode consistent with the supreme law of the land. 

In the convention which framed the Federal Constitution, Governeur Morris said, on the 
subject of slavery, that it was necessary to be unjust to the South or unjust to humanity. 
He declared in favor of humanity, but voted in favor of the South. We are now exempt 
from the alternative presented to the mind of Morris. The attempt of the South to secede 
from the Union has released us from it. We can now be just to humanity without being 
unjust to tlie South. In other words, we are at liberty to abolish slavery throughout the 
United States if it can be done in a mode consistent with the supreme law of the land. 
And one does not, by favoring the measure in this form, become an abolitionist in the sense 
of the term as heretofore used. He may still remain as he may have ever been heretofore, 
in favor of a sacred adherance to the Constitution in its integrity, and in favor of no meas- 
ures not strictly in conformity with tiiat instrument. We are now in a situation to treat this 
as we would any other question of fundamental law. We need not treat it at all in a partisan 
point of view. In fact the discussion itself seems to raise us above partizanship. We seem 
to occupy an elevated position, from which we can look at this complicated social and in- 
dustrial pi'oblem, and attempt to solve it, as citizens, as statesmen and as men. 

The Federal Constitution, embodying in details a system of National government, was 
adapted by common consent of the States and of the people. All are parties to it, all are 
bound by it, and aji have a right to insist that it shall be obeyed and that it shall not be 
changed without their consent. This consent has been given. That the Constitution may 
be changed, has been expressly stipulated by all parties concerned, in and by the instru- 
ment itself, and the mode of making changes has been clearly pointed out. 

Article V. of the Constitution of the United States reads as follows : " The Congress, 
whenever two-thirds of both Houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to 
the Constitution • or, on the application of the Legislatures of tWo-thirds of the several 
States, shall calfa convention for proposing amendments, which in either case, shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the Legis- 
latures of three-fourths of the several States, or by conventions in three-fourths thereof, 
as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress : Provided, 
that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and 
eight, shall in any manner eftect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first 
article ; and that no State, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in 
the Senate." 

This language is plain. Two modes of amendments are here provided for. First, 
the amendments are to be proposed by a two-thirds vote of both Houses of Congress, when- 
ever Congress shall deem it necessary ; and, Second, Congress is required, on the application 
of the Legislatures of two-thirds of the several States, to call a general convention for the 
purpose of proposing amendments. Then, in either case, before the amendments thus 
proposed can become part of the Constitution, they must be ratified by the Legislatures of 
three fourths of the States, or conventions in three-fourths of the States, as the one or the 
other mode may be proposed by Congress. 

The first part of the proviso has ceased to operate by the lapse of time, and as to the 
other, no one would think now of depriving any State of its equal voice in the Senate. 
The article is broad enough to embrace the subject of slavery and the slave trade in all their 
forms; and by reference to the first subdivision of Section nine of Article first, referred 
to in the proviso, which manifestly relates to the slave trade on the ocean, or at least em- 
braces it, and by reference to the fourth subdivision of the same Section also referred to, in the 
])roviso, taken in connection with the third subdivision of Section two of Article first, which 
subdivision refers to direct taxes and representation in Congress based on slave population, 
there can be no doubt that the subject of slavery was contemplated by this Article fifth 
giving power of amendnients. 

This Article fifth is, in and of itself, a full power of attorney, given by all the States and 
the people of all the States, as well those which formed the Constitution originally, as 
those wliich have since acceded to it by coming into the Union, authorizing amendments to 
i\ie Constitution in the mode and manner therein pointed out ; and upon well settled prin- 
ciples, amendments proposed and ratified as there stated, would become a part of the Con- 
stitution, ami fully binding upon all the United States, as well upon those which should 
favor the ratification, as upon the minority if any there should be, of one-fourth or less who 
might not ratify siich amendments or be in favor of them. 

Plenary power i.s here given to amend the fundamental law of the nation. This 
plenary power remains unrevoked. It has been in no way modified. It stands as it 



stood originally. The withdrawal, nominal or real, of several States from the Union, has 
not revoked or modified it. Upon clear prinoipl(?s of law and logic, no authority short of 
that which conferred the power can revoke or modify it. The power can be withdrawn or 
revoked, only by expunging the Article Fifth from the Constitution, and that can be done 
only in the form of an amendment, proposed and ratified in the very mode pointed out 
in the Article itself. It is thus seen the Federal Constitution contains in this respect a 
strong element of self preservation. On the other hand, as the Constitution can be 
amended, it contains a most valuable element of popular power. It has stabihty and yet 
it has flexibility. 

When the power in question shall be exercised in the manner specified, the acts done 
and amendments made in such exercise, will, as I have said, be fully binding upon the 
States and people that conferred the power, that is to say, the whole United States. An 
amendment therefore, by which slavery sht.uld be abolished throughout the United 
States, proposed and ratified in pursuance of Article Fifth, before cited, though all should 
not join in the ratification, would be binding upon all, as much as if all had concurred 
heartily and unanimously in the ratification. It is a question of clear right, of power and 
of law. No State and no part of the people of the States can avoid these conclusions, 
except by means and principles of reasoning, simply revolutionary. 

An amendment of the Constitution, proposed and ratified in this way, and the entire 
and final extinguishment of slavery in the United States in this way, would also at the 
same time, and in this respect, be a full maintenance of the Federal Con^tltutlon. Tt 
would be acting in pursuance of it. both in its spirit and in its letter. It would be as much 
an adherence to and maintenance of the Constitution as would be even the enforcement of 
the clause requiring the surrender of fugitive .slaves, so long as that clause shall remain 
in force. 

And this is the reason why this mode of getting rid of the system of slavery in this 
country is not obnoxious to the odium that attached to the abolitionists so called. They, 
to a great extent, deserved that odium. They soaght to attain their object by improper 
means. They sought the overthrow of slavery not in pursuance of the Constitution but 
in violation of it. They were ready to use and they did use violent means. The one 
mode can be pursued by the citizen consistently with his legal and his national 
obligations. The other cannot. The one mode is legal and conservative. The other is 
revolutionary, 

I have thus far discussed the question before us, as one simply of power, of law and 
of right, but it will not be out of place, for the purpose of removing objections, and of 
opening the way more clearly for the exercise of the power and the right, to glance a few 
moments at the eflfects which their exercise may produce in diiferent paits of the 
country. 

The people to be effected by this measure may be arranged in three general classes. 
First, the Northern people, who I presume wold not be aifected injuriously by it, and 
they would be relieved by it from a subject wliich to many is one of conscientious aversion 
and abhorrence. Second, the people of the Border States, who would for the time being 
sufler great material loss by the meisure ; but I think it fair to assume, and this appears 
to be also the opinion of many of their own leading men, that the loss and injury would 
be but temporary, and that far greater advantages would ultimately result from the free 
labor system, in the impulse it would give to productive industry and every species of 
enterprise. Be this as it may. the people of the Border States as well as of all the 
States, in accepting and adopting the Constitution with the power of amendment, 
accepted it with all its advantages, and also with ail the losses and disadvantages that 
might spring from it, directly and indirectly, immediately and remotely, in all the changes 
through which the country might be called upon to pass. The Border States will therefore 
have no just grounds of complaint. Third, the people of the Southern States in rebel- 
lion, who would doubtless suffer much from the measure, but they have divested them- 
selves of all right to be consulted on the subject, by allowing their representatives to be 
v/ithdrawn from Congress, and their States to be withdrawn from the Union, and in this 
way breaking up and destroying the Union so far as their action or their non-action could 
efiect that result. I speak now of the Southern people in the seceded States as a body of 
people under the rules governing them in respect to majorities, regardless of a minority that 
may have existed there and may now exist there in favor of the Union. The time has been 
since the war began, when we might have produced most valuable results by cultivating 
an intimate relation with that minority, but as it appears to me, we have been carried past 
that time in the history of the controversy. Whether the people of the seceded Stales 



6 

would be injured or not by the proposed measure, we are not now bound to enquire. 
While they inijiht perhaps still claim to be heard in Congress if their repreieataiives 
ghould be again returned, and also in the ratification of amendments wlien proposed, 
vel iu the present slate of public affairs North and South, we may with justice and 
l)ropriety lay entirely out of view, their wishes on the subject, and also the effects the 
measure might have upon their material interests and even upon their social condition. 
All we have to do is to see that our action shall be in conformity with the plain letter of 
the Federal Constitution. We are entitled to regard the (juestion as one especially 
within the province and jurisdiction of the States and the people now represented in 
Congress, who still adhere to the Union, and who may under the Constitution take part 
in the proposed amendment. In other words this is a question solely for the consideration 
of those who compose the present United States, for it is throughout these United States 
that it is proposed to abolish slavery by an amendment of the Constitution. 

I have not de«raed it necessary in the present condition of our National affaire, to 
examine this question as one of policy. Events have, as it appears to me, in one way and 
another, drifted us past the question of policy. The time was when this part of the 
(«ubject should have been considered. So long as there was hope of a restoration of 
peace and the Union under the Constitution by means of conciliation, we were not at liberty 
to disregard it. But it appears to me that such time is past. The last Presidential 
election closed the door on this point. Let us see if this is so. In the first place as I 
have said, we are under no obligations to consult the wishes or interests of the Southern 
States and people now in rebellion. They cannot complain of us in this respect for they 
cannot complain of the consequences of their own wrong. If they find the way of the 
transgressor harder than they anticipated they must blame themselves for the disappoint- 
ment. In the second place, the policy of Mr. Lincoln, which is to be the policy of the 
administration for several years to come, is fixed and settled for a prosecution of the war 
against the South without any efforts at compromise or conciliation, till the Southern 
States and people shall lay down their arms. In the third place, it seems to be now well 
settled that the South are determined to insist on their independence as the first and maia 
condition of peace. Put these three propositions together and they, as it appears to me, 
exclude the question of policy entirely from the subject before us, and reduce the 
contest, between the North and South, down to one of material power on the one side 
and on the other. 

How fa,r other provisions of the Constitution' may be effected by the measure in 
question, I have not deemed it necessary to enquire. I assume as I think it fair to 
assume, that if this principal amendment is adopted, the Consitution as amended will, 
in its practical application and by judicial construction, be made to haiuionize together as 
a whole. The amendment will have the same effect upon State legislatures and State 
Constitutions, so far as they may be found in conflict with th« Federal Constitution as 
amended. They must, either by alteration or by judicial construction be made to harmo- 
nize with the Supreme law of the land as that Supreme law shall be found in the Federal 
Constitution, in its amended form. This doctrine is familiar to all jurists. As an 
example, the amendment of a State Constitution at once of itself overides and repeals all 
Sute statutes inconsistent with it. Y/here the two cannot stand together the infenor must 
yield to the superior. So of the National Constitution as amended, if it shall be amended. 
It is the Supreme law of the land, and as such it must override all laws and all State 
Constitutions, as to which it is supreme, so far as it may be inconsistent with them. They 
must yield before it, if not by actual raodilication at least in practical application and by 
judicial construction. It will of course be understood tiiat I am now speaking of the 
Uni/id Stairs— of the States that remain in the Union, and that will remain in it and 
coustituto the Unifed Sla'cs when tliis contest is over. There can be but one supreme 
law on a given question. That Sujireme law is the law. Every thing inconsistent with it 
is not law, and is a nulity. Under these familiar principles all laws and statutes, and all 
I>arts of the Federal Constitution will be brought into complete harmony with that 
Constitutifiii in its amendod form. 

Nor have I deemed it necessary to enter into a discussion in reference to the war or 
the mode of its prosecution. There are many good men who cannot conscientiously 
KUjiport Mr. Lincoln, in much of his policy and in many of his mea.suies, but in the 
f)rc.seiit condition of j>arties and of the country, I for one am not in favor of throwing 
any obstacles in the way of a prosecution of the war by such legitimate means, as those 
having control of pubiic affairs shall deem necessary. The thing which the present 
Administration has in hand is to close the war, and that speedily, with the Union restored 



and fnaintainod intact. This ob1is:ation was renewed and enforced by the result of th<» 
late election. I hold the Administration and Mr, Lincoln and his party to a stiict account- 
ability on this point. At the same time my hopes for a restoration of the Union by 
military force under Mr. Lincoln's policy are not strong, and while I will not despair of 
the Republic, my strongest fears are, that it is destined as one of the results of the present 
controversy to be shorn of some of its fairest proitortions. 

I do not place m:.ch confidence in the various rumors of peace and of peace 
negotiations. Powerful motives at once suggest themselves for setting these rumors afloat, 
whether there is any real foundation for them or not. Peace may be restored soon. We 
all hope it will be. But the end is not yt-t, and I fear we are yet far from it. There is 
no doubt danger of foreign intervention in some form, and that before long. Such 
intervention would, to sny the least of it, gieatly increase our foreign complications. It 
must b" prevented if possible by any honorable means. United we might bid defiance to 
a world in arms, but we are hatdly in a condition to do it now. 

I however make the point distinctly, tliat in any contingencj', whether we are as & 
result of the war, to fix a line of boundary between the Mo.tliern and Soulhe n Confede- 
racies as two independent nations; or whether we are to foice a submission of the South 
and restore the Union by military power; in either event arid in any contingency that can 
spring from the state of affairs as they now exist, the Con^titution had better be amended 
extinguishing slavery entirely in what may finally constitute the United States of 
America after the piesent contest is over. This is a point desirable to attain. Let this 
dist.uibing element — this ever recurring bone of contention be forever removed from the 
political system of the United States. In this way, so far as we may possess the right 
and the material power, and so far as Fede al action can go, we shall have as one of the 
results of the war if not as one of its consequences, a country and nation that, so far as 
this subject is concerned, will be free, not only in name but in fact. 

I may remark in passing that this thing is going to be done. It is a foregone conclu- 
sion. Passing events cannot be controlled. Jnevitabie consequences cannot be resisted. 
The train is in motion. It is running with irresistable momentum. It will stop for no 
one. Party policy and discipline cannot arrest it. The eow catcher will sweep everything 
before it. I know it is not generally advisable to jump on a train in motion. Disaster 
may result from it, but I think it is far less dangerous than to lie down on the track in 
front of the engine and attempt to stop it in its course. To jump on and ride is prefer- 
able by far. As this thing therefore is to be dune, and that befi^re long, the sooner it is 
done, and done with, the better. Let us join in and help do it. 

Perhaps it should not be regarded as a singular coincidence, in the terrible ordeal 
through which the country is now passing, that while we are discussing this question in 
the North, and while the abolition of slavery has been urged most earnestly as a power- 
ful means of bringing the Southern States into subjection, they of the South are 
considering the same measure in a different form, as the surest means of achieving their 
independence. This marks the tendency o" events, and shows to what point the 
American people are drifting on this subject. (Jonsitlering however the well tried 
adaptation of slave labor for Southern productions in a Southern climate, we should 
distrust all movements in the South tending to the extinction of that system there, until 
the free labor system in some form shall have been successfully tried in that section of 
the country. An overwhelming necessity may induce their action. A desire and a hope 
to secure the recognition or at least the favor of foreign nations may induce it. A 
combination of various motives may induce it. But the South will not enter heartily 
upon measures for the extinction of the slave system, until they shall clearly see from 
actual experience, that the free labor system woidd, in their' section of the country, 
possess far greater advantages, while it v/ould be less burdensome and far less objection- 
able in other respects. 

As to foreign nations I am strongly inclined to the opinion that their apparent wishes 
and sympathies on this subject should not influence our action. The leading Monarchies 
of Europe are playing a shrewd game v.ith this Republic. They are looking at our 
struggle with a most provoking chuckle of gratification. They would rejoice in our 
national humiliation. They secretly rejoice to see us hack each other to pieces. For 
slavery they care not, so that this nation is brought low. Let us disapi^oint their hopes. 
This is a domestic question. We alone have to deal with it. Our' own judgment should be 
the rule of our action. And we nuist grapple with the subject. We must show a 
determination to solve it. We must show that we are able to solve it. If we show that 



I » 



we are masters of our situation we shall secure that forbearance from other nations which 
nothing else can secure. Bold and independent action on our part will be far the most 
dignified and far the most likely to .command respect. 

I have thus presented this subject. I have endeavored to present it fairly on its 
merits. It is a vast subject. The stoutest intellects may well shrink from its contempla- 
tion. It branches out into innumeral)le questions which have crowded upon me inces- 
santly in the course of the investigation. I have however restricted myself so far as I 
could to that which appeared pertinent to the main subject before us. I have not gone 
into a calculation or estimate of the number of States that would probably declare in favor 
of the {iroposed measure. I have assumed that if it could be shown to be proper, 
Congress would p oi)ose it, and three-fourths if not all of the States would ratify it 
when it came before them for that purpose. The argument shows that the measure is 
constitutional. To ray mind it also shows that the measure is proper and that now is 
the best time to adopt it. The investigation leads us to drink at original fountains. I 
have gone back to Ihe National landraaik of seventeen hundred and eighty-seven. I 
have endeavored to look at the subject calmly frorn that stand point. As we mingle with 
the sages and statesmen of that heroic age, we feel the inspirations which their presence 
is calculated to impart. These inspiialions are for country and for freedom. Looking at 
the subject before us through the lens of seventeen hundred and eighty-seven, and its 
principal difficulues disappear. 

I have looked at the question as an original one — as if the Constitution were now to 
be fonned for the first time. I have endeavored to ascertain what I would do, and what 
the country would do, with the question as an original one; looking at it, in full view of 
our present condition, down through seventy-five years of national prosperity and 
renown. 

I have giA'en the subject much refiection, and I think that now is the time to act 
upon it. Now, as soon as tha measure can be matured in Congress and brought before 
the State Legislatures or the people in State Conventions for their ratification. "Why 
should delays intervetiel Why should obstacles be thrown in the way 1 Let us act upoa 
the present condition of things. Let us improve the winds and tides of the passing hour. 
Let us take a step the fame of which will resound through the world. We have now a 
fit oppoi-ti\nity to clear our National escutcheon from the reproach, the inconsistency and 
the fact of human bondage. For one I say let the work be accomplished. Let this 
Nation stand before the world as what it professes to be — a free countiry. Let it rise to 
the proud consciousness, that even thiough fiery trials and through much tribulation, it 
has finally shaken off its self-imposed shackles, and has trampled them in the dust. 



i« weo'cii 




.T.'^0^ V'^'^'v/ "^^^^^'Z V'=^''\** 



K^ 




*o 









P!^^ 0^'"^. ^'^' .^^'°"o '"'^^^ 0'°"%. ^-^ 



f^\/ %^^-/ X/^^'/ %-^^-/ V 

'.r^^T-U '^'X '^^*i^'- - /^;^'^^"^ ^' 



